DAULAT S/O LALSINGH @ JHAKKAD v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMB/5610/2026 · 2026-04-27
Pramil Kumar Mathur
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 2583 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 2583 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2026:RJ-JP:17652] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 5610/2026 Daulat S/o Lalsingh @ Jhakkad, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Village Vilond, Police Station Kaman, District Deeg, Rajasthan. (Presently Confined At District Jail Deeg). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Deepesh Kumar Sharma with Mr. Kunal Swami, Ms. Prachi Gaur For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Sharma, PP Ms. Dhriti Sharma for Mr. Kunal Kant Rawat HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR
Order 27/04/2026
1. The petitioner has preferred this bail application under Section 483 of BNSS in FIR No.8/2025 registered at Police Station Kama, District Deeg for offences under Sections 189(2), 115(2) and 126(2) of BNS, 2023.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the complainant and perused the material available on record.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that though there are allegations of causing injuries to complainant Hansraj, Nishant and Himanshu but none of the injuries have been opined to be dangerous to life. It is further submitted that in the
[2026:RJ-JP:17652] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-5610/2026] present matter, a compromise has been arrived at between the parties and in this regard affidavits of the complainant Hansraj, his son Nishant, Angoori, and Chander have been filed. Petitioner is behind the bars since 05.03.2025 without any criminal antecedents. The trial of the case will take considerable time, therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in further custody, consequently, the bail application deserves to be allowed.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application.
5.
Learned counsel for the complainant has acceded to the
contentions raised by learned counsel for the petitioner and raises no objection if the bail application of the petitioner being allowed.
6. On consideration of the rival submissions and material available on record and in light of submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner but without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, I am inclined to grant benefit of bail to the petitioner.
7. Consequently, the bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is directed that the petitioner Daulat S/o Lalsingh @ Jhakkad, be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court on all subsequent dates of hearing till conclusion of the trial.
(PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR),J Chandan/37